From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1I1ALg-0006sk-Ba for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:16:33 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l5L0FQIO031941; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:15:26 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l5L0DHUZ029511 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:13:17 GMT Received: from [192.168.0.104] (ip68-8-82-214.sd.sd.cox.net [68.8.82.214]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675086466A for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:13:16 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4679C297.5070300@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 17:13:11 -0700 From: Josh Saddler User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070520) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] how to handle sensitive files when generating binary packages References: <200706200047.04951.vapier@gentoo.org> <1182344680.7336.18.camel@TesterBox.tester.ca> <200706201607.07713.vapier@gentoo.org> <20070620211214.0cca11b9@snowflake> <46798BE2.7040300@gentoo.org> <20070620212555.21b99076@snowflake> In-Reply-To: <20070620212555.21b99076@snowflake> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig81A3C18251A2249127909752" X-Archives-Salt: f789c1ad-cd5c-4475-9435-af222c3c38ff X-Archives-Hash: 99ae2d91e6f6072612ad975e94b02117 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig81A3C18251A2249127909752 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 15:19:46 -0500 > Andrew Gaffney wrote: >> I'm not sure that's really a feasible solution (but then you probably >> weren't suggesting it with that intention). Being able to create a >> "backup" of any installed package without re-emerging is pretty >> handy. Many people use it and there would be a revolt if quickpkg >> were removed. >=20 > Then live-filesystem-generated packages could be marked as 'not for > redistribution'. >=20 That's probably a good idea if only because there are certain binaries that we're not allowed to redistribute...things like Firefox with certain USE flags, or freetype with the better hinter. Neither of these can be redistributed in binary form with certain USE flags; Firefox will have to ship without its proper name, and freetype will have to use the sucky -- er, "magically more free" -- hinter. @vapier: Do potential licensing/copyright issues like these factor into your proposal in any way? wolf31o2 mentioned installing several identical boxes simultaneously using the same redistributed binaries, but in the case of these two packages, if they're built with -bindist on the live filesystem, redistributing it as-is isn't allowed. --------------enig81A3C18251A2249127909752 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGecKa5aFMlhMsVyURAhSFAKDfL8ZkZOEZIejtjrfkyjaPdgNGMwCdHT8L 7NoX6Bjt1elm4cgtSXnoek4= =rim6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig81A3C18251A2249127909752-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list